cu_act

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It discloses that stale states are rejected and actions are bounded, which is useful, but it does not mention whether the action mutates state, whether commit=true is required, what side effects occur, or what happens on failure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. Every element ('bounded action', 'state_id', 'stale states rejected') adds meaningful value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having an output schema, the tool's 18 parameters and lack of annotations demand a richer description. The current text does not explain valid action values, the meaning of 'bounded', how stale states are detected, or the role of optional parameters like commit and click_method.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It only mentions state_id and vaguely references 'action' through the term 'bounded action'; the other 16 parameters, including required 'app', are not explained at all.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Execute'), names the resource ('state_id'), and clarifies the scope ('one bounded action'). It effectively distinguishes cu_act from sibling tools like cu_batch and cu_observe by focusing on a single actionable state.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this tool is for performing a single action on a state, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like cu_batch or cu_observe, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.